40 criminal sanctions eat while seated at the table. In another prison, there was a specific cell for solitary confinement, with a concrete bed, chair, and table, in addition to an isolation cell with no furnishings. It appeared that the prison had no fixed policy on which of the cells was used for solitary confinement. One foreign national prisoner who had been placed in isolation because of the risk of self-harm told the NPM that he had refused food because he did not want to eat from the floor. The Deputy-Ombudsman found that solitary confinement must not be enforced in conditions similar to an isolation cell. Similarly, while a prisoner is segregated for the purpose of investigating a breach of prison rules, holding the person in isolation cell conditions is not appropriate unless the prisoner’s behaviour exceptionally merits this. The Deputy-Ombudsman also stated that, as a rule, there are no grounds for not providing any furnishings in the cell, including fixed furniture, even from the perspective of isolation under observation or observation. The Deputy-Ombudsman stated that the isolation cell should not be used in any other situation than those in which the lack of furnishings is clearly justified. Follow-up: The prison responded that the place where disciplinary punishments are enforced had been changed and the punishment is now carried out in a normal cell from which the television has been removed. In the future, prisoners will be held in isolation cells only if their behaviour calls for isolation cell conditions. According to the prison, the isolation cell is not used for observation under isolation, as there is another cell for this purpose, which is equipped with a fixed bed. • The isolation cell was equipped for camera surveillance and the prisoner was informed that when the red light on the camera was lit, the camera was in operation. The Deputy-Ombudsman stated that camera surveillance in a cell violated the prisoner’s right to privacy, and therefore its use is possible only under circumstances specifically referred to in law. Camera surveillance in a cell occupied by a prisoner is possible only as a safety measure. A person in solitary confinement cannot be monitored through a security camera. The Deputy-Ombudsman commended the fact that the prisoners were able to see for themselves whether or not they were under camera surveillance. The Deputy-Ombudsman recommended, however, that the use of the cell for disciplinary purposes be discontinued, because the presence of the camera alone was likely to create distrust in prisoners. Follow-up: The prison responded that the unfurnished cell with a security camera was used only when there were good reasons for it. In these cases, the prisoner is informed that they will be able to see when the camera is operating. Camera surveillance is not used any more than is necessary.